I didn't know they scanned real people, lame. I thought there were great artists/modellers behind the trailer... omg, what a huge surprise. At this rate, with 3d scanners... where will be the artists? doing retopologies? that's not art imo.
As a note, notice how the bullets break as glass. That's a huge mistake.
Oh come on Blaizer ... they choosed the most appropriate solution, fitting the context and most likely saved a huge amount of time and energy doing so. What's wrong with that ? I think it's very smart, actually. Saying "that's not art" is just like criticizing photography because "it's cheating."
(wait ... were you just trolling ? Haha in that case, you win )
No, i wasn't trolling. This is too lame, just that.
They can save time, of course, but this lacks artistic merit in all the senses. I also think it's very smart, and of course... they don't need to pay an elite Artist, and the save money and time. And if they lack of artictic level, it's the best way to finish their promotion.
Well, i hope they use the scanners aswell for the ingame models, because the models in The Witcher 2 can't be compared to these ones scanned and with real textures. They can't compete.
Another thing is that we must have in mind is that when we see all these videos, we say, omg, they are "great artists". And for me, this is not ART, it's like to grab a stone from reality and scan it. Where's the merit? where's the artist's level?
And Pior, this is not like photography. This will be a job killer
No more character artists... only lame "retopo artists", or lame "overpainters" ¬¬
I'll just remind you that the teaser wasn't made by the same people that are making the game.
I know it, and they should contract them for the character assets or simplily: http://www.ir-ltd.net/
progress... yep, we are nothing compared to machines . In 10 years, with just pressing one button or doing a mouse click, anyone can be a "true artist". At least if you have the money for the hardware/devices needed.
In photography, if you want to take good photos and call yourself an "artist", you must waste a lot of money... cough cough.
Well I personally don't think that the artistic merit of the trailer lies in how the character models were built.
It looks stunning and works very well on all levels (storytelling, emotional response, aesthetics.) Considering that all the models are in still poses and are supposed to be photorealistic anyways, I actually like the idea of scanning actors *much more* than hiring someone to painstakingly create a fully convincing 3D model and crazy complex shaders just for the sake of a few shots. For what it's worth, there could have been zero 3D involved (neither scans or hand made models) and the whole thing could have been made with 2D compositing tricks - it would have been just as good (but maybe a bit cheap looking)
I find that they went for a very elegant solution ; and again to me the true artistic merit of the trailer lies in what it is talking about, not how it was made.
Now of course if their universe was supposed to be stylized in some form or another, that would be a different problem altogether. Anyways - I don't think than in 10 years, Pixar models will be automagically made at the click of a button!
Art or not art, there are some cool shots on Infinite-realities blog. I find these to be very useful for learning purposes. Analyzing real life is good, but seeing scanned data with plain blinn material provides another layer of information about shapes and their intensity/depth. It's almost like filtered reference for sculpting
Creating the vast majority of stuff that we can't scan in from real life?
Most of us take photo-sourcing in all its shapes and forms for granted, but that too is another form of scanning in real-life data instead of drawing it by hand.
progress... yep, we are nothing compared to machines . In 10 years, with just pressing one button or doing a mouse click, anyone can be a "true artist". At least if you have the money for the hardware/devices needed.
It's an interesting thought but where do you decide to draw the line? Is photoshop cheating (so to speak)? Is using photo overlays (for textures) cheating? Is using dDo cheating? Is motion capture cheating? Is using a mouse cheating if we're playing quake 1?
As it currently stands all the creativity comes from us humans, not generated by computers without our input.. Some jobs might become automated. But that makes more sense than continuing to do things the hard way, just because we want a job (or don't want all the hours we spent learning a skill to become wasted) :P
The "artists" will be working as the chinese workers of foxxcon, doing the same annoying task every day. It will be worse than the actual 3d monkeys or juniors...
The vast majority of stuff we see nowadays on games can be scanned, so we only would need to build the meshes in some cases. We won't need to paint or take photos as references.
And creativity... games lack creativity nowadays, almost all are war games like COD, without inventive and innovation. Do you want a soldier better than the ones on the latest COD or battlefield 3... scan it, it will be better, profit! a realistic weapon... the same, and with one click you obtain: diffuse, specular, gloss, etc. piece of cake. With DDO and substance designer, the texturer job is almost dead.
...but that too is another form of scanning in real-life data instead of drawing it by hand.
That is what we call lack of talent, lack of artistry. Nowadays, too many people say they don't need to learn to draw, anatomy, color, composition, topology, etc. and in fact, you can see artists that only know to use one app: Zbrush.
The practices you are criticising Blaizer are the only things that can potential bring games development back to an acceptable cost. Games are crazy expensive to make now and in case you've not noticed there's a next gen around the corner which is going to be even more expensive.
Sure it's nice to be able to make something from scratch, or see something that's been made from scratch. But if they fooled you into thinking a modeller made these characters from scratch, why does it matter how they went about it?
If someone uses a ZBrush basemesh to start a character instead of starting from a cube, are they less of an artist than you too?
Hasn't seemed to dampen the need for artists in film...
Should also add scanning is not a magical 'press button and mesh appears' procedure, its actually quite time consuming and challenging to clean up a scan mesh well.
All these practices are used to achieve the maximum realism, and are quite expensive. Valve used it for L4D, and it's one of the few companies that used this tech. Later, they usually ship the game, and the game don't live for all the expectations, like happened with The Witcher 2, Dragon Age 2 or Mass Effect. Very cool CGs, oh yeah!!! with scanned characters!!, but the at the end.. the game.. errr
All this marketing is very expensive, no doubt.
I think this won't make the games cheaper to produce, first, because all these services are pretty expensive (In a few years... maybe, but not now). And secondly, if only the bigger companies can afford to have installations with an excellent mocap system, how the hell a small studio can afford this tech? is a no way unless if you pay for it as a SERVICE.
Like cd projekt red did with Platige and like Platige did with infinite-realities. It was needed 3 companies for the production of this video, 3 companies!.
DDO, Substance Designer are example of tools that will make costs more acceptable. Tools that make our job in minutes and with changes in realtime.
If someone uses a basemesh from other artist or a cube... he/she will have less value as artist compared to the one that does not need to do a retopology and wasted time doing it. In all my years of work, the workflow of "sculpt and then retopo" takes more time than the linear workflow of "concept-model-sculpt small details and end of story". An artist with technical knowledge about topologies, rigging, etc. will be better in all the ways.
Someone that only use Zbrush is not good for a company if he doesn't know how to model properly. I'm fed up of these people because they need to learn a lot, and that's a lot of time wasted that means too much money for a company. They tend to make the development much slower.
Want to reduce costs? contract just only true artists, not wannabes and so many juniors without knowledge. They are earning a salary without producing a shit, and that's what happens in Spain and in too many places.
Too many people eating from the same bottle.
BTW, retopology tools are quite advanced nowadays, and you can do the job very fast, you can re-project a base mesh onto a scanned person, and use a smudge tool...
Mohaha, the rule of the environment artists is coming, down with character artist! You get on the 3D scanner of people, but try to do the same with environments.
Anyway, I don't believe that 3D scanner will replace artists, its more a quick way to get a basemesh to work with, still need to do changes and create lowpoly for game engines.
I've been a lurker here for quite a few years. Amazing forum. I just happened across this thread today and thought I would try and cast away peoples fears about scanning.
I didn't know they scanned real people, lame. I thought there were great artists/modellers behind the trailer... omg, what a huge surprise. At this rate, with 3d scanners... where will be the artists? doing retopologies? that's not art imo.
As a note, notice how the bullets break as glass. That's a huge mistake.
Hi, my name is Lee, I designed this single shot capture system at IR.
Just to make a few things clear. There is an incredible amount of artistry behind such a custom built system. It has not been technically built but carefully tried and tested artistically over nearly 6 years of sacrificed time to research and develop. There was no rule book or manual of how to built it and make it work. Taking single photographs is one thing, controlling multiple cameras is a whole other ball game.
I first started to experiment with photogrammetry scanning back in 2008. I have been in the games industry since I was 16 back in '96, rendering on computers since I was 8 in '88. I'm disciplined in low polygon art, from developing for PC and Playstation in the late 90's. I have a solid background in traditional painting and 3d modelling (3DSMax, Softimage, Lightwave, PS, ZBrush etc etc)
I built this system for a reason. Time, money and realism. 2d Google images or 3d.sk flat art wasn't enough for me to get the job done.
Believe me when I say you need very good artist to be able to deal with this kind of data, to be able to use it effectively and correctly. The guys at Platige did some great work with this data but they were under time pressure and had a short period to get this all done.
In this industry time is money. I used to be an environment artist for Playstation 2 titles, I then moved into developing CG characters and I became increasingly frustrated at the amount of time it took to develop realistic looking characters. 3D scanners at the time used to cost the price of a house, now you can build one yourself for very little money. Also with the arrival of Kinect it will become more and more prevalent. Sorry.. but you can't stop progress. I've been cheating for years... *gasp* I use a wacom!!!
Don't worry, artists aren't going any where. And your 'job' is safe.
It's an old argument. Art is cheating. Artists have always used the most advanced tools available to them at the time. The tools are a means to an end, and not every piece needs to be about the technical aspects of its creation.
Don't forget that artists were worried that 3DCG would make them obsolete. Or that photography would make them obsolete.
Exactly, TK. If something can be scanned for cheap instead of being painfully modelled, then that's a *good* thing!
It's also good to note that raw scanning was appropriate here because of the still nature of the shots. The animated shots (like the closeups in the trailer!) sure use regular modeling techniques.
And I don't think that anyone is forcing us to work on super-realistic projects anyways ... the choice is up to the artist really!
Regarding the one click solutions : I think it is a bit misinformed to say that we can, for instance, scan weapons with all their textures automatically like that. That's just not the way it works, for many reasons. Sales pitches of scanning tech solutions might make some people think that way, but in practice the reality is very different.
I'm sorry Blaizer but you are making a fool out of yourself.
I'm pretty sure we cannot scan most things from the Mass Effect Series, Dishonored, Team Fortress 2, Half-Life series, Portal series, TES series, Batman Arkham series, etc and most other big name games of the last few years. There are a lot of games with a distinct visual style out there, and that stuff cannot be scanned.
The fact you consider dDo and Substance Designer to have nearly killed off the texturing job shows how much you get caught up in hyperbole. All this stuff still takes an artist to get even decent results.
Also, what the hell do you mean that Mass Effect, The Witcher 2, Dragon Age 2, and L4D didn't live up to their expectations? All of them have great reviews.
No, i wasn't trolling. This is too lame, just that.
They can save time, of course, but this lacks artistic merit in all the senses. I also think it's very smart, and of course... they don't need to pay an elite Artist, and the save money and time. And if they lack of artictic level, it's the best way to finish their promotion.
Well, i hope they use the scanners aswell for the ingame models, because the models in The Witcher 2 can't be compared to these ones scanned and with real textures. They can't compete.
Another thing is that we must have in mind is that when we see all these videos, we say, omg, they are "great artists". And for me, this is not ART, it's like to grab a stone from reality and scan it. Where's the merit? where's the artist's level?
And Pior, this is not like photography. This will be a job killer
No more character artists... only lame "retopo artists", or lame "overpainters" ¬¬
first of all, bullshit -you clearly never worked with scans
second of all - you clearly didn't even bother to look closely at those images
those scans are just a base to work with, look at the final result, compare it with the scanned shots, there is so much more work to this, done by experienced and skilled character artists than just retopo of a scan.
Oh come on Blaizer ... they choosed the most appropriate solution, fitting the context and most likely saved a huge amount of time and energy doing so. What's wrong with that ? I think it's very smart, actually. Saying "that's not art" is just like criticizing photography because "it's cheating."
i think that is comparing apples and oranges.
i agree with Blaizer, it is lame in this context. digital doubles for films are a separate matter though.
however, i dont think it is a matter of being worried of losing your job. i actually turn down work now days that involve scan data cleanup. they need experienced artists to be able to clean up scan data work properly without losing realism. but since i hate scan data cleanup work i decline them. it is just not a fun process to clean up that pile of shit and at the end i dont even feel like showing off that work derived from scan data.
i have a good amount of scan data clean up work that i will never show in my folio only because i dont like taking credit for that type of work.
Saying that the characters in this trailer are not art, is basically pointing out that apples are not oranges. And that's a fine point to make. But it shouldn't be any more offensive to the person who created these characters to say that it's not art, than it is to say that an orange isn't red.
The stuff in this trailer is a major technical achievement. But it's not exactly artistic. And that's fine too.
To me, artists ragging on scan data is like a carpenter ragging on another carpenter for using a nail gun or a drill instead of a hammer, they're all just tools.
If your goal is to create a fantastical creature from your own imagination, obviously you would do that from scratch.
If your goal is to create the most realistic representation of an actual person in 3d, why wouldn't you use scan data? The tech is there now that makes it a lot easier and a lot less expensive than it has been in the past, doing it all by hand is counter productive only for the sake of nostalgia, and would have likely resulted in an inferior product.
The whole is it or isn't it art discussion is just silly. 3d scan data is just another form of reference, its simply better, more accurate reference. Please raise your hand if you've never collected multiple references images from multiple angles when you were trying to match a character's likeness.
Oh, of course you would do that? But you'd never think about using scan data? That's hypocrisy.
Or maybe you've never created zbrush alphas for skin details from photo reference? Its exactly the same thing, we're simply seeing better and better tools for it now.
So, unless you paint every pixel of every texture, sculpt/model every triangle of every mesh by hand, and have never studied reference and do everything 100% out of your glorious creative imagination, you're a hypocrite for talking down about using scan data.
Yeah EQ, and furthermore I still don't get why the result is not "exactly artistic" like BJ said. This trailer was never supposed to be a character modeling demo reel...
Also when it comes to visual taste, I'd rather see the character as it is portrayed here, idealized but with imperfections (bumpy nose!) as opposed to yet another smoothed out Ellen Page CG lookalike, really.
It's not "ragging", it's merely pointing out that one thing is not another. Saying that using scan data is not art shouldn't be something that's offensive.
Granted, it's kinda funny how someone can perfectly enjoy a picture, then when they find out it was made a certain way it kills their enjoyment. What does it matter? If you like it, then you like it.
My point is that the goal of creating something fantastical is an artistic endeavor, and the goal of implementing a realistic representation is a technical endeavor. They're just two different things. When I saw this trailer I just thought "Cool beans. Why wasn't this shot live-action?", it's not as if it's representative of what we'll see in-game anyway.
Saying that using scan data is not art shouldn't be something that's offensive..
Where do you draw the line? What sort of reference is and isn't allowable to remain artistic integrity? Who makes the rules? Its all a bunch of BS.
Granted, it's kinda funny how someone can perfectly enjoy a picture, then when they find out it was made a certain way it kills their enjoyment. What does it matter? If you like it, then you like it.
Yeah, this is really ammusing to me as well. "Its awesome!" oh he used a pencil instead of a pen? "Now it sucks!" This isn't specific to our industry though, Its in everything remotely artistic. "Awesome drawing, which pencils did you use? "Awesome photos, which camera/lens did you use?" etc, as if the medium or tools are somehow more important than the actual content.
My point is that the goal of creating something fantastical is an artistic endeavor, and the goal of implementing a realistic representation is a technical endeavor. They're just two different things.
I find very little in games art, no - art period, that isn't both an artistic and technical endeavor.
When I saw this trailer I just thought "Cool beans. Why wasn't this shot live-action?", it's not as if it's representative of what we'll see in-game anyway.
Yeah, I'm with you there. I'm not really a fan of these ultra high end teaser videos that have nothing to do with the actual game. No matter how cool this trailer is, it tells me nothing about how the game will look or play(other than general themes). That's my biggest complaint.
What do you mean? Art is about expression, engineering is about solving a problem. Are you expressing yourself? Then it's art. Are you solving a problem? Then you're engineering a solution.
It shouldn't be offensive to say that an engineer is not an artist any more so than it is offensive for someone to say that I'm not an engineer. And figuring out the tech for scanning data from the real world is an engineering problem, not a free expression.
It's not "ragging", it's merely pointing out that one thing is not another. Saying that using scan data is not art shouldn't be something that's offensive.
this.
3d scan data in most cases are more than 50% of the asset. it is lot more than reference.
of course lot of our tools include real photo reference in one way or another, but full body scan is a different thing.
it isnt hating on a new tool, it is more like pointing out that the other guy didnt make that furniture with a new tool, rather he went and bought a set from IKEA.
to make it easier to understand, think of it like someone else doing 70% of the work and then you do the last 30%.
it isnt a bad thing but it doesn't deserve the full credit.
Yeah, but that's a problem of scope then. When someone enjoys the Cyberpunk 2077 trailer, that person doesn't judge the artistic merit of the whole based on how the main character model was built. I don't see how pointing it out that it was made one way or another removes any value from the trailer at all.
If anything, it shows that the guys in charge of producing it knew exactly what they were doing, and this alone makes me respect them a whole lot.
Following your analogy : a room made of perfectly hand-crafted furniture can look like crap as a whole, and a room made of the cheapest IKEA stuff can look great if arranged with taste.
Yeah, but that's a problem of scope then. When someone enjoys the Cyberpunk 2077 trailer, that person doesn't judge the artistic merit of the whole based on how the main character model was built.
Following your analogy : a room made of perfectly hand-crafted furniture can look like crap as a whole, and a room made of the cheapest IKEA stuff can look great if arranged with taste.
i dont get your point. my point is 3d scanning is cheap. it is done for a reason because it is cheap to save cost. that is why it doest deserve same respect as hand crafted model.
Ok, so only a certain percentage of "cheating" aka reference, is allowable? Someone should make up some charts and graphs so we all know where we stand.
Ok, so only a certain percentage of "cheating" aka reference, is allowable? Someone should make up some charts and graphs so we all know where we stand.
you dont need a chart, just judge it by the amount in $$$ it is cheaper to use 3d scanning. simple as that.
you dont need a chart, just judge it by the amount in $$$ it is cheaper to use 3d scanning. simple as that.
Naw, its just a bunch of machismo BS. Like saying "I painted this with a mouse" or "I didn't use reference" as if these statements make your work inherently better.
MM, I am not sure why a 100% realistic, hand crafted model of an existing person would deserve more "merit" than an efficient scan.
Now of course I agree that it takes a lot of skill and knowledge in order to create a realistic CG model of a human, but such skills are quite irrelevant in the context of that trailer featuring still models. Therefore I still don't get why anyone would be disappointed by the use of scan data here.
If anything, I find it deliciously refreshing and surprising - it's a nice reminder that today, just like in the past, all it takes to make something stunning is a strong vision. Technical complexity and big money are not necessary, and that's a good thing!
So, unless you paint every pixel of every texture, sculpt/model every triangle of every mesh by hand, and have never studied reference and do everything 100% out of your glorious creative imagination, you're a hypocrite for talking down about using scan data.
i dont get your point. my point is 3d scanning is cheap. it is done for a reason because it is cheap to save cost. that is why it doest deserve same respect as hand crafted model.
in my pursuit of high art, i create models as vertex positions in notepad
MM, I am not sure why a perfectly realistic hand crafted model of an existing person would deserve more merit than an efficient scan.
Now of course I agree that it takes a lot of skill and knowledge in order to create a realistic CG model of a human - but such skills are quite irrelevant in the context of that trailer featuring still models.
that kind of work definitely deserves LOT more respect than 3d scanning his head.
now i agree that it makes more production sense to do 3d scanning because it is faster and cheaper. my point has nothing to do with the over all merit of the trailer.
it is kind of same reason Blizzard values hand painted textures more than highpoly-baked or photo source textures.
I like to think of it as a much much work can an artist pump out issue. An artists job in game changes all the time.
Pixel art -> tiling textured walls -> low polygon modeling -> high poly modeling -> sculpting -> Maybe working with 3d scanned data???
Our jobs have changed so much in 30 years, and they are going to change much more in 30 more years. Working with scanned data is job going to change how much art an artist can do, there will still be a need for more artists, and we are going to be able to put out more art faster, it's inevitable.
Ok, well I've seen blizzard hire a lot of people who do the whole baked normal map thing lately, esp for their next gen team, so maybe that adage is a bit outdated.
Its probably a little more accurate to say that blizzard likes to hire talented people, similar to Valve, moreso than any specific skill set.
But one obvious thing is that even 30 years in the future, Nintendo won't be 3D scanning their Yoshi models from live actors. Bit of an extreme example of course, but that's basically my point - we should always use what is appropriate for the job, and not do something one way instead of another "just because".
I like to think of it as a much much work can an artist pump out issue. An artists job in game changes all the time.
Pixel art -> tiling textured walls -> low polygon modeling -> high poly modeling -> sculpting -> Maybe working with 3d scanned data???
Our jobs have changed so much in 30 years, and they are going to change much more in 30 more years. Working with scanned data is job going to change how much art an artist can do, there will still be a need for more artists, and we are going to be able to put out more art faster, it's inevitable.
Because all that stuff just deals with the technicalities of implementing something. But artistic expression is more than just implementation. I'd like to think that my job is more than just being someone's implementation-monkey. That part of the reason I get paid is my own artistic ability.
When I look at a scene like in this trailer, what is there for me to appreciate? That the scene looks cool? Well yeah, but that goes more to whoever came up with the theme, the designs maybe, that kind of stuff. But that they shot some actors isn't particularly interesting to me. It's awesome, don't get me wrong, it's quite the technical achievement, and it looks cool. But it's not very interesting to me in and of itself.
Blizzard has recently highed a bunch of high poly scifi artists, and Starcraft 2 has plenty of normal mapped goodness. The in game cinematics are amazing.
sure, Blizzard or Valve will also use 3d scanning for their projects may be.
but none of that has anything to do with what i am saying.
in general i know for a fact that a good company like Valve will tend to hire some one who can hand sculpt a 3d likeness rather than someone who only knows how to clean up scan data.
i believe hand crafted work has more value than machine generated or mass produced product. feel free to disagree with that.
Replies
As a note, notice how the bullets break as glass. That's a huge mistake.
(wait ... were you just trolling ? Haha in that case, you win
They can save time, of course, but this lacks artistic merit in all the senses. I also think it's very smart, and of course... they don't need to pay an elite Artist, and the save money and time. And if they lack of artictic level, it's the best way to finish their promotion.
Well, i hope they use the scanners aswell for the ingame models, because the models in The Witcher 2 can't be compared to these ones scanned and with real textures. They can't compete.
Another thing is that we must have in mind is that when we see all these videos, we say, omg, they are "great artists". And for me, this is not ART, it's like to grab a stone from reality and scan it. Where's the merit? where's the artist's level?
And Pior, this is not like photography. This will be a job killer
No more character artists... only lame "retopo artists", or lame "overpainters" ¬¬
I know it, and they should contract them for the character assets or simplily: http://www.ir-ltd.net/
progress... yep, we are nothing compared to machines
In photography, if you want to take good photos and call yourself an "artist", you must waste a lot of money... cough cough.
It looks stunning and works very well on all levels (storytelling, emotional response, aesthetics.) Considering that all the models are in still poses and are supposed to be photorealistic anyways, I actually like the idea of scanning actors *much more* than hiring someone to painstakingly create a fully convincing 3D model and crazy complex shaders just for the sake of a few shots. For what it's worth, there could have been zero 3D involved (neither scans or hand made models) and the whole thing could have been made with 2D compositing tricks - it would have been just as good (but maybe a bit cheap looking)
I find that they went for a very elegant solution ; and again to me the true artistic merit of the trailer lies in what it is talking about, not how it was made.
Now of course if their universe was supposed to be stylized in some form or another, that would be a different problem altogether. Anyways - I don't think than in 10 years, Pixar models will be automagically made at the click of a button!
http://www.ir-ltd.net/360-degree-full-body-scanning#
http://www.ir-ltd.net/scan-of-a-scan
http://www.ir-ltd.net/cracking-the-black-box-of-photogrammetry-scanning
http://www.ir-ltd.net/platige-image-ir
Creating the vast majority of stuff that we can't scan in from real life?
Most of us take photo-sourcing in all its shapes and forms for granted, but that too is another form of scanning in real-life data instead of drawing it by hand.
It's an interesting thought but where do you decide to draw the line? Is photoshop cheating (so to speak)? Is using photo overlays (for textures) cheating? Is using dDo cheating? Is motion capture cheating? Is using a mouse cheating if we're playing quake 1?
As it currently stands all the creativity comes from us humans, not generated by computers without our input.. Some jobs might become automated. But that makes more sense than continuing to do things the hard way, just because we want a job (or don't want all the hours we spent learning a skill to become wasted) :P
The vast majority of stuff we see nowadays on games can be scanned, so we only would need to build the meshes in some cases. We won't need to paint or take photos as references.
And creativity... games lack creativity nowadays, almost all are war games like COD, without inventive and innovation. Do you want a soldier better than the ones on the latest COD or battlefield 3... scan it, it will be better, profit! a realistic weapon... the same, and with one click you obtain: diffuse, specular, gloss, etc. piece of cake. With DDO and substance designer, the texturer job is almost dead.
Look:
https://sketchfab.com/show/hZimZzGxleN5z9GgguH5DgvbQDl
skeletons, guns, furniture, vehichels, almost all can be scanned... and with environment art, more of the same. The size will not be a big deal.
more:
https://sketchfab.com/show/g8WoR7NjYX5CSWroIhS8GSI2LoU
That is what we call lack of talent, lack of artistry. Nowadays, too many people say they don't need to learn to draw, anatomy, color, composition, topology, etc. and in fact, you can see artists that only know to use one app: Zbrush.
Sure it's nice to be able to make something from scratch, or see something that's been made from scratch. But if they fooled you into thinking a modeller made these characters from scratch, why does it matter how they went about it?
If someone uses a ZBrush basemesh to start a character instead of starting from a cube, are they less of an artist than you too?
Hasn't seemed to dampen the need for artists in film...
Should also add scanning is not a magical 'press button and mesh appears' procedure, its actually quite time consuming and challenging to clean up a scan mesh well.
...some would say it takes an artist.
All this marketing is very expensive, no doubt.
I think this won't make the games cheaper to produce, first, because all these services are pretty expensive (In a few years... maybe, but not now). And secondly, if only the bigger companies can afford to have installations with an excellent mocap system, how the hell a small studio can afford this tech? is a no way unless if you pay for it as a SERVICE.
Like cd projekt red did with Platige and like Platige did with infinite-realities. It was needed 3 companies for the production of this video, 3 companies!.
DDO, Substance Designer are example of tools that will make costs more acceptable. Tools that make our job in minutes and with changes in realtime.
If someone uses a basemesh from other artist or a cube... he/she will have less value as artist compared to the one that does not need to do a retopology and wasted time doing it. In all my years of work, the workflow of "sculpt and then retopo" takes more time than the linear workflow of "concept-model-sculpt small details and end of story". An artist with technical knowledge about topologies, rigging, etc. will be better in all the ways.
Someone that only use Zbrush is not good for a company if he doesn't know how to model properly. I'm fed up of these people because they need to learn a lot, and that's a lot of time wasted that means too much money for a company. They tend to make the development much slower.
Want to reduce costs? contract just only true artists, not wannabes and so many juniors without knowledge. They are earning a salary without producing a shit, and that's what happens in Spain and in too many places.
Too many people eating from the same bottle.
BTW, retopology tools are quite advanced nowadays, and you can do the job very fast, you can re-project a base mesh onto a scanned person, and use a smudge tool...
Anyway, I don't believe that 3D scanner will replace artists, its more a quick way to get a basemesh to work with, still need to do changes and create lowpoly for game engines.
Hi, my name is Lee, I designed this single shot capture system at IR.
Just to make a few things clear. There is an incredible amount of artistry behind such a custom built system. It has not been technically built but carefully tried and tested artistically over nearly 6 years of sacrificed time to research and develop. There was no rule book or manual of how to built it and make it work. Taking single photographs is one thing, controlling multiple cameras is a whole other ball game.
I first started to experiment with photogrammetry scanning back in 2008. I have been in the games industry since I was 16 back in '96, rendering on computers since I was 8 in '88. I'm disciplined in low polygon art, from developing for PC and Playstation in the late 90's. I have a solid background in traditional painting and 3d modelling (3DSMax, Softimage, Lightwave, PS, ZBrush etc etc)
I built this system for a reason. Time, money and realism. 2d Google images or 3d.sk flat art wasn't enough for me to get the job done.
Believe me when I say you need very good artist to be able to deal with this kind of data, to be able to use it effectively and correctly. The guys at Platige did some great work with this data but they were under time pressure and had a short period to get this all done.
In this industry time is money. I used to be an environment artist for Playstation 2 titles, I then moved into developing CG characters and I became increasingly frustrated at the amount of time it took to develop realistic looking characters. 3D scanners at the time used to cost the price of a house, now you can build one yourself for very little money. Also with the arrival of Kinect it will become more and more prevalent. Sorry.. but you can't stop progress. I've been cheating for years... *gasp* I use a wacom!!!
Don't worry, artists aren't going any where. And your 'job' is safe.
Don't forget that artists were worried that 3DCG would make them obsolete. Or that photography would make them obsolete.
It's also good to note that raw scanning was appropriate here because of the still nature of the shots. The animated shots (like the closeups in the trailer!) sure use regular modeling techniques.
And I don't think that anyone is forcing us to work on super-realistic projects anyways ... the choice is up to the artist really!
Regarding the one click solutions : I think it is a bit misinformed to say that we can, for instance, scan weapons with all their textures automatically like that. That's just not the way it works, for many reasons. Sales pitches of scanning tech solutions might make some people think that way, but in practice the reality is very different.
Anyways - cool trailer
I'm pretty sure we cannot scan most things from the Mass Effect Series, Dishonored, Team Fortress 2, Half-Life series, Portal series, TES series, Batman Arkham series, etc and most other big name games of the last few years. There are a lot of games with a distinct visual style out there, and that stuff cannot be scanned.
The fact you consider dDo and Substance Designer to have nearly killed off the texturing job shows how much you get caught up in hyperbole. All this stuff still takes an artist to get even decent results.
Also, what the hell do you mean that Mass Effect, The Witcher 2, Dragon Age 2, and L4D didn't live up to their expectations? All of them have great reviews.
first of all, bullshit -you clearly never worked with scans
second of all - you clearly didn't even bother to look closely at those images
those scans are just a base to work with, look at the final result, compare it with the scanned shots, there is so much more work to this, done by experienced and skilled character artists than just retopo of a scan.
i think that is comparing apples and oranges.
i agree with Blaizer, it is lame in this context. digital doubles for films are a separate matter though.
however, i dont think it is a matter of being worried of losing your job. i actually turn down work now days that involve scan data cleanup. they need experienced artists to be able to clean up scan data work properly without losing realism. but since i hate scan data cleanup work i decline them. it is just not a fun process to clean up that pile of shit and at the end i dont even feel like showing off that work derived from scan data.
i have a good amount of scan data clean up work that i will never show in my folio only because i dont like taking credit for that type of work.
hopefully there will always be nostalgia for the technique we each specialize in - it's worked out great for me so far
The stuff in this trailer is a major technical achievement. But it's not exactly artistic. And that's fine too.
If your goal is to create a fantastical creature from your own imagination, obviously you would do that from scratch.
If your goal is to create the most realistic representation of an actual person in 3d, why wouldn't you use scan data? The tech is there now that makes it a lot easier and a lot less expensive than it has been in the past, doing it all by hand is counter productive only for the sake of nostalgia, and would have likely resulted in an inferior product.
The whole is it or isn't it art discussion is just silly. 3d scan data is just another form of reference, its simply better, more accurate reference. Please raise your hand if you've never collected multiple references images from multiple angles when you were trying to match a character's likeness.
Oh, of course you would do that? But you'd never think about using scan data? That's hypocrisy.
Or maybe you've never created zbrush alphas for skin details from photo reference? Its exactly the same thing, we're simply seeing better and better tools for it now.
So, unless you paint every pixel of every texture, sculpt/model every triangle of every mesh by hand, and have never studied reference and do everything 100% out of your glorious creative imagination, you're a hypocrite for talking down about using scan data.
Also when it comes to visual taste, I'd rather see the character as it is portrayed here, idealized but with imperfections (bumpy nose!) as opposed to yet another smoothed out Ellen Page CG lookalike, really.
Granted, it's kinda funny how someone can perfectly enjoy a picture, then when they find out it was made a certain way it kills their enjoyment. What does it matter? If you like it, then you like it.
My point is that the goal of creating something fantastical is an artistic endeavor, and the goal of implementing a realistic representation is a technical endeavor. They're just two different things. When I saw this trailer I just thought "Cool beans. Why wasn't this shot live-action?", it's not as if it's representative of what we'll see in-game anyway.
Where do you draw the line? What sort of reference is and isn't allowable to remain artistic integrity? Who makes the rules? Its all a bunch of BS.
Yeah, this is really ammusing to me as well. "Its awesome!" oh he used a pencil instead of a pen? "Now it sucks!" This isn't specific to our industry though, Its in everything remotely artistic. "Awesome drawing, which pencils did you use? "Awesome photos, which camera/lens did you use?" etc, as if the medium or tools are somehow more important than the actual content.
I find very little in games art, no - art period, that isn't both an artistic and technical endeavor.
Yeah, I'm with you there. I'm not really a fan of these ultra high end teaser videos that have nothing to do with the actual game. No matter how cool this trailer is, it tells me nothing about how the game will look or play(other than general themes). That's my biggest complaint.
It shouldn't be offensive to say that an engineer is not an artist any more so than it is offensive for someone to say that I'm not an engineer. And figuring out the tech for scanning data from the real world is an engineering problem, not a free expression.
this.
3d scan data in most cases are more than 50% of the asset. it is lot more than reference.
of course lot of our tools include real photo reference in one way or another, but full body scan is a different thing.
it isnt hating on a new tool, it is more like pointing out that the other guy didnt make that furniture with a new tool, rather he went and bought a set from IKEA.
to make it easier to understand, think of it like someone else doing 70% of the work and then you do the last 30%.
it isnt a bad thing but it doesn't deserve the full credit.
If anything, it shows that the guys in charge of producing it knew exactly what they were doing, and this alone makes me respect them a whole lot.
Following your analogy : a room made of perfectly hand-crafted furniture can look like crap as a whole, and a room made of the cheapest IKEA stuff can look great if arranged with taste.
i dont get your point. my point is 3d scanning is cheap. it is done for a reason because it is cheap to save cost. that is why it doest deserve same respect as hand crafted model.
you dont need a chart, just judge it by the amount in $$$ it is cheaper to use 3d scanning. simple as that.
Naw, its just a bunch of machismo BS. Like saying "I painted this with a mouse" or "I didn't use reference" as if these statements make your work inherently better.
Now of course I agree that it takes a lot of skill and knowledge in order to create a realistic CG model of a human, but such skills are quite irrelevant in the context of that trailer featuring still models. Therefore I still don't get why anyone would be disappointed by the use of scan data here.
If anything, I find it deliciously refreshing and surprising - it's a nice reminder that today, just like in the past, all it takes to make something stunning is a strong vision. Technical complexity and big money are not necessary, and that's a good thing!
crap, almost made it, I use reference.
http://www.cgfeedback.com/cgfeedback/showthread.php?t=4092
that kind of work definitely deserves LOT more respect than 3d scanning his head.
now i agree that it makes more production sense to do 3d scanning because it is faster and cheaper. my point has nothing to do with the over all merit of the trailer.
it is kind of same reason Blizzard values hand painted textures more than highpoly-baked or photo source textures.
Hehe, you realize where pior works, right?
why do you think i mentioned it.
Pixel art -> tiling textured walls -> low polygon modeling -> high poly modeling -> sculpting -> Maybe working with 3d scanned data???
Our jobs have changed so much in 30 years, and they are going to change much more in 30 more years. Working with scanned data is job going to change how much art an artist can do, there will still be a need for more artists, and we are going to be able to put out more art faster, it's inevitable.
Ok, well I've seen blizzard hire a lot of people who do the whole baked normal map thing lately, esp for their next gen team, so maybe that adage is a bit outdated.
Its probably a little more accurate to say that blizzard likes to hire talented people, similar to Valve, moreso than any specific skill set.
But I'm sure Pior will tell me if I'm wrong.
But one obvious thing is that even 30 years in the future, Nintendo won't be 3D scanning their Yoshi models from live actors. Bit of an extreme example of course, but that's basically my point - we should always use what is appropriate for the job, and not do something one way instead of another "just because".
Because all that stuff just deals with the technicalities of implementing something. But artistic expression is more than just implementation. I'd like to think that my job is more than just being someone's implementation-monkey. That part of the reason I get paid is my own artistic ability.
When I look at a scene like in this trailer, what is there for me to appreciate? That the scene looks cool? Well yeah, but that goes more to whoever came up with the theme, the designs maybe, that kind of stuff. But that they shot some actors isn't particularly interesting to me. It's awesome, don't get me wrong, it's quite the technical achievement, and it looks cool. But it's not very interesting to me in and of itself.
but none of that has anything to do with what i am saying.
in general i know for a fact that a good company like Valve will tend to hire some one who can hand sculpt a 3d likeness rather than someone who only knows how to clean up scan data.
i believe hand crafted work has more value than machine generated or mass produced product. feel free to disagree with that.